“Politicians are so desperate to find ‘the moderate Muslims’ that they’ll do extraordinarily stupid things,” wrote anti-sharia activist Pamela Geller in 2014 concerning the formation of a congressional Ahmadiyya Muslim Caucus. As this series will show, she had considerable reason to doubt the expectations this tiny Muslim sect, almost universally persecuted by other Muslims, often globally raises as an antidote to Islam’s sharia dangers.
Official Ahmadi organs such as the True Islam online public outreach project consistently present a message that is soothing to non-Muslim ears. In this “True Islam…fighting is only permissible in self-defense.” Accordingly, an “aggressive ‘jihad by the sword’ has no place in Islam,” but rather Muslims should “wage a bloodless, intellectual ‘jihad of the pen.’”
The True Islam website elaborated on Ahmadi beliefs on a page that has apparently now been removed:
Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is the only Islamic organization to believe that the long-awaited messiah has come in the person of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) of Qadian, India. Ahmad claimed to be the metaphorical second coming of Jesus of Nazareth and the divine guide, whose advent was foretold by the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad. The Community believes that God sent Ahmad, like Jesus, to end religious wars, condemn bloodshed and reinstitute morality, justice and peace.
Such pleasing pieties give the Ahmadis an outsized role in the imaginations of non-Muslims, particularly political leaders. For example, the Ahmadiyya Muslim Caucus boasted bipartisan cofounders, the California Democrat Representative Jackie Speier and her Virginia Republican colleague Frank Wolf, a renowned, longstanding religious freedom advocate. For his engagement on behalf of oppressed Ahmadis worldwide, he received the 2013 Ahmadiyya Muslim Humanitarian Award at the American Ahmadis’ annual Jalsa Salana convention.
Previously on July 27, 2012, Speier, Wolf, and Representative Mike Honda had cosponsored a Congressional resolution with Representative Zoe Loefgren praising the current Ahmadi “caliph,” Mirza Masroor Ahmad. The resolution hailed Ahmad’s “commitment to world peace, justice, nonviolence, human rights, religious freedom, and democracy.” The same day, Ahmad addressed congress members, staff, and others in the Rayburn House Office Building.
Ahmad also made his first visit that same year on December 3-4 to the European Parliament (EP) in Brussels as the guest of the parliament’s newly created cross-party Friends of Ahmadiyya Muslims Group. An official Ahmadi website was enthused that on December 4 “he delivered a historic keynote address to a packed audience of more than 350 guests representing 30 countries.” While he lauded Islam’s supposed “specific guidance on how to establish peace,” Charles Tannock, a British Member of the EP (MEP) and the group chair, remarked upon the address that “Ahmadi Muslims are a welcome example of tolerance in the world.”
Ahmad has met with numerous dignitaries, including the Canadian Prime Ministers Stephen Harper and Paul Martin, particularly at the annual Ahmadi National Peace Symposium in London, which began in 2004. Then the London mayor, now the British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson presented Ahmad with a London bus souvenir at the 2012 symposium. At the 2015 symposium, his fellow Conservative Party member, the then-Secretary of State for International Development Justine Greening, claimed that Ahmad’s remarks “totally demolished” the Islamic State’s claims.
Similar enthusiastic politicians’ statements accompanied the February 26, 2016, True Islam launch at Washington, DC’s Rayburn House Office Building. For Honda, the 2015 Ahmadiyya Muslim Humanitarian Award laurate, True Islam’s Eleven Precepts “really reflects the principles of the constitution of the United States.” This Ahmadi interpretation of Islam “didn’t sound too much different from what I had learned from the history of Islam.”
Texas Democratic Representative Al Green in his address pronounced that “Islam speaks for truth, and justice and freedom and equality. Islam is a religion of peace.” He noted that he wears in expression of his Christian beliefs a pin with “God is good all the time,” which he ignorantly declared was a “rough translation of Allahu Akbar.” He intended to state this phrase, which in Arabic means “Allah is greater” and in its origins signifies that Islam’s god is supreme (hence the phrase’s use by jihadists as a war cry), on the floor of the House of Representatives.
Rather than any jihadist threats, Green’s main concern, proclaimed to audience applause, was “solidarity with the Muslim community” and that “we all stand for justice for Islam.” Without any evident expertise, he self-confidently asserted that “Islam is one of the world’s great religions and no religion, no religion, condones the taking of innocent human life.” Under his fatwa, jihadists such as those in the Islamic State “are only evil people doing evil things. It is not religion.”
Honda and his fellow California Democrat, Representative Judy Chu, invoked America’s painful history of interning Japanese-Americans during World War II. Honda condemned “yellow journalism” for incitement against Japanese-Americans, while Chu warned that “we must never use fear as an excuse to harm innocent people.” She criticized “presidential candidates that are promoting hate speech” and proposals for “ill-conceived laws against Muslim immigrants and others.” “We must stand up to hate and make sure that our voices are there against xenophobia and racism. They have no place in our country,” she intoned.
Chu indicated once again how politicians enjoy posing with Ahmadis. These “good” Muslims supposedly vouch for Islam’s benign nature and disprove the faith’s critics as misinformed bigots. Yet as a forthcoming article will reveal, among the numerous problems that make such hopes for the Ahmadis misplaced is the complete rejection this fringe group faces among the global Muslim community.
Steve says
Pakistan is the largest stronghold in the world for the Ahmadis, and there they’ve been officially declared kuffar.
Infidel says
They’ve been declared non-Muslim by the OIC itself: no Muslim country can recognize them as an islamic sect
CRUSADER says
Yet, it’s not as if they are harmless Jains, right?
gravenimage says
The Ahmadi don’t believe in waging violent Jihad–but they still believe in imposing brutal Shari’ah law wherever they can.
RonaldB says
Let me compliment Jihad Watch and Andrew Harrod in particular, for finally taking on the question of what the Ahmaddi sect of Islam is in relation to Western civilization.
Do the Ahmaddis represent a denatured form of Islam, which if it spread, will actually alleviate the threat of Islam to the West? Is the Ahmaddi sect simply an irrelevant entity, as it is universally rejected by mainstream Muslims and has no influence on Islamic movements? Or, is the Ahmaddi a stalking horse for the real Islam, disguising itself as a new, harmless Islam, while bringing in the traditional Muslim cannons, such as the Koran and the Hadith? As a stalking horse, Ahmaddi would be a fall-back Islam which could hide under a rock if the pressure to eject Islam from Western countries becomes too great. Once the pressure subsides, the Koran, Hadith, and sunnah would still be there, ready for the more traditional interpretation.
I don’t know the answer to these questions. I hope to see them treated in the detail I have come to expect from Jihad Watch.
By the way, the quote in the article can be found in http://portland.ahmadiyya.us/about-us ,
Some relevant facts: an Ahmaddii Muslim, Abdus Salaam, was responsible for developing the Pakistani nuclear program, which may yet wind up killing millions of Indians. In 1948, when Israel declared itself a country, the leader of the Ahmaddis declared jihad against Israel in the UN. On the other hand, the Ahmaddis currently have a good relationship with Israel and are represented in Israel.
mortimer says
Yes, bravo. Andrew Harrod wrote a winning article here that clearly and fairly exposes the deception of the Ahmadis.
mortimer says
Thanks to RonaldB for this: “an Ahmaddii Muslim, Abdus Salaam, was responsible for developing the Pakistani nuclear program”. Very quotable. Just what a leftarded pseudo-journalist doesn’t want to hear.
Terry sullivan says
Yet amhadys are proscribed in pakistan
mortimer says
The Ahmadis are among the worst liars in the Islamic world, because they always introduce themselves by trying to give the impression that they represent all Muslims, rather than their own small, barely significant sect of 1.5 million or as many as 8 million. Only Ghana and Sierra Leone have a significant percentage of Ahmadis. In most countries, Ahmadis are less than 1% of the population. The leader of the Ahmadi sect said in 2002 that there were 200 million Ahmadis worldwide, an egregious whopper of a falsehood. So the lying in Ahmaddiya starts at the very top of the sect. Lying, however, is not limited to Ahmadis but is common in all Islamic proselytism.
Islam has so many abhorrent and backward teachings that it cannot be proclaimed without considerable, devious deception to keep the would-be convert from discovering Islam’s most unpleasant realities such as Arab racist supremacism, misogyny and a common, unbearable hubris among those who consider themselves well-informed about the minutiae of the Islamic faith and rituals. The latter causes many converts to leave.
While I am eager to say there are many fine, courteous and even noble Ahmadis, Ahmaddiya cannot be promoted without considerable deception. The naïve, gullible Pollyannas in the Leftard media eat up with a spoon whatever they are told about relatively-peaceful Ahmaddiya, whenever these unstudied journalists need a fast quote about how Islam is allegedly peaceful. Deceitful Ahmadi spokesmen willingly trick the journalists.
The problem is that Ahmaddiya is NOT STANDARD ISLAM, but a heresy within Islam (for a number of reasons) and most Muslims think that Ahmadis should be punished for promoting their heresy.
The mainstream of Muslims (over a billion) are Sunnite and most of them want to suppress Ahmaddiya.
RonaldB says
What you say is very true.
Again, the question in my mind is, does the Ahmaddi heresy provide a cover for teaching the Koran, Haddith and Sunnah, which can morph back into violent, expansionist Islam? I would like to see a study on how many Ahmaddis “revert” back to traditional, violent, expansionist Islam?
I would also question the position of the Ahmaddis on sharia law. Sharia law typically rejects secular authority, and mandates violent enforcement of Islamic dogma. So, are the Ahmaddis simply a sect that would bring in traditional sharia via voting, or do they actually advocate a secular or non-Muslim government?
I personally would not admit any more Muslims at all into the US, including the Ahmaddis. Simply being non-violent doesn’t mean they would fit in or enhance the current US culture and society.
CogitoErgoSum says
in the past I have mentioned excluding Muslims from eligibility for immigration into the U.S. It was pointed out to me that people can lie and say they are not Muslim. Also, many of those who say they are not Muslim could sooner or later convert (or revert) to Islam once they become citizens. So, I see no other way to stop the spread of Islam other than through either total exclusion of the practice of Islam or else by means of a more gradual method whereby harsh restrictions are placed upon Muslims by making them into sort of reverse dhimmi.
CRUSADER says
I vote for reversing the dhimma.
But, that might get into “hypocrisy for survival sake” region of justification!
CRUSADER says
What do you do with Muslim converts within confines of national border?
Such as in prison system….
gravenimage says
Despite their being so persecuted by Muslims, the Ahmadi regularly carry water and provide a smokescreen for orthodox Islam.
CRUSADER says
—- The many voices of Islam —-
https://www.paulist.org/the-conversation/the-many-voices-of-islam/
What is happening between Sunni’s and Shia’s around the world is a catastrophe. What is happening in Syria is a catastrophe. One voice doesn’t mean a uniformity, but a diversity of respected voices.”
So spoke Tariq Ramadan, professor of contemporary Islamic Studies at Oxford University, at the Islamic Society of North America’s 50th Annual Convention that took place August 30-September 2 in Washington, D.C.
In 2010 Christians noted 100 years of work for unity among the followers of Jesus in what has come to be known as the ecumenical movement. And Muslims are now laying the foundational principles for a corollary movement within their own ranks.
In a session titled “Saved Sect? Theology and Ethics of Pluralism.” Mr. Ramadan and Yasir Qadhi addressed the situation among Muslims where, as in Christianity, there are several branches – Sunni, Shia, Salafi, Sufi, just to name a few schools of thought within their community – with each school seeing itself as rightly guided and laying claim to being the “saved sect.”
As Christians did in the early part of the 20th century, Muslims are now asking themselves:
How do we navigate the choppy waters of intrafaith diversity? How do we remain faithful to our particularities while accepting differences? Toward this end, Mr. Ramadan and Mr. Qadhi examined the theology of inclusiveness and the ethics of disagreement in building the beloved community.
Agreement on Essentials, Pacifism, Inclusivism —-
Mr. Qadhi, an Islamic lecturer and author of several books about Islam, emphasized agreement on the essentials of that faith, granting that “large segments of the umma (Muslim community) don’t care about these schisms, sects and marginal issues. The average Muslim doesn’t need to specialize in these questions. As long as he believes in the six pillars of Islam, prays five times a day, and accepts the Qur’an, it will be enough.”
Mr. Qadhi noted that no matter what theological position one holds, the Prophet Mohammad never sanctioned physical violence against someone who holds another position.
“If I am a Sunni, I cannot allow anyone to blow up a Shi’a shrine,” he said. “Argue what you want to argue, but allow others the freedom to believe what they want to believe. Scholars of all stripes need to understand that there is a time and a place and a methodology for talking about the divisive issues.”
“I might disagree with certain things in others’ interpretation of scripture,” Mr. Qadhi continued, “but it’s not my right to force my theology on other people. These schisms/sects will remain. Let Allah be the judge. We shouldn’t be threatening or harming one another. We should not be guilty of the sin of arrogance. I might believe that my theology is right, but that doesn’t mean I am a better person than the other. If we both believe we’re onto the truth, then we should follow the Qur’anic principle that truth should lead to humility. We should treat others as we ourselves wish to be treated,” said Mr. Qadhi.
Three Conditions —-
Mr. Ramadan picked up on the understanding of truth. “There is one humanity,” he said, “but Allah also wanted diversity within humanity. Diversity is both a challenge and a necessity. The only truth is with Allah.”
Mr. Ramadan cited three conditions required for all Muslims to live together peacefully:
“One, we need to respect the sincerity of the other, to grant the good intention of the other. We must always start with this.
“Two, competence. Talk at the level of your knowledge. If you don’t know, refrain from judging. And if you do know, then exercise your competence with respect.
“Three, be careful. Respect the boundaries.” His reference here was to the Ahmadiyyas. a reform movement that grew out of Sunni Islam. It was founded in 1889 in India by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who claimed to be the metaphorical second coming of Jesus and the divine guide whose appearance was foretold by the Prophet Mohammad. Most Ahmadis believe he was the long-awaited mahdi or messiah.
But since in Islam the notion is that the Prophet Mohammad is the last of the prophets, the question then becomes in the eyes of many other Muslims:
Are these people really Muslims or not?
Mr. Ramadan’s response. “In the case of the Ahmadiyyas who believe there is another prophet after Mohammad, it’s no longer an intrafaith dialogue, but an interfaith dialogue.”
The overall discussion was one that strikes familiar chords for Christians, who have had and continue to have their own struggles around scriptural interpretation, doctrinal distinctions between essentials and non-essentials, and questions around whether certain reform movements (like the Mormons) are to be recognized as Christians or not.
In the end, any gains made relative to unity among Christians and unity among Muslims will have positive and far-reaching repercussions within the unity of the human family at large. We will do well to empathically support each other’s efforts and celebrate each other’s progress. In the big picture, there is just one human family, and everyone in it is a child of God.
— Father Thomas Ryan, CSP
(Father Thomas Ryan, CSP, directs the Paulist North American Office for
Ecumenical and Interfaith Relations in Washington, D.C.)
Terry sullivan says
Morden uk has biggest ahmady mosque
Conflict locally with other moslems
Locals ignored over concerns-labor party gets their votes
SAFI says
Radical Islam: KILL ALL JEWS!
Moderate Islam: KILL SOME JEWS! (Also known as KILL THE “ZIONISTS” – wink, wink)
Pr Moe was an exponent of the former, but decent people reject both variants.
mortimer says
Safi, what are your thoughts about AHMADDIYA … ? … that is the topic we are discussing here
Terry sullivan says
Same koran?
SAFI says
They are the posterboys of the “moderate islam” deception which westerners are all too happy to be deceived by because it reinforces their own cultural relativist/nihilist worldview. Ahmaddiya’s outwardly professed “moderation” is quite consistent with with Pr. Moe deceptive prescriptions on how to lull the enemy to sleep; feign pacifism when you’re weak, break treaties and renew the assault as soon as you’re strong.
CRUSADER says
That seemed obvious from your earlier “moderate islam” chant.
andra says
In Germany the Ahmaddiyas are very aggressivly spreading into the east part of the country. There is hardly any bigger city where they are not planning to build a mosque.
In Germany they also are labelling themselves as moderate and peaceful. But we should Keep in mind that they live on the same koran as the Sunni and the Shiites. So we should not follow them.
They are not peaceful, I believe. They may not yet be waging, but in my opinion they simply do not because they are not (yet) strong enough.
The Ahmaddiyas use words to attack, e.g. the “Information” that pork turns men gay.
CRUSADER says
I am quitting bacon ? tomorrow…. maybe….
Kepha says
Harrrummmppppppff! I’ve eaten pork all my life, and all of my sexual urges, whether sinful or sanctified (life-committment heterosexual marriage) have been hetero.
It should tell us enough that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad claimed to be the promised Mahdi, a violent figure if ever there was one (and just another of the false Christ’s and prophets against whom Jesus warned).
I wonder what will happen when Panjabi Ahmadis come up against Sudanese Ansar, who believe that Muhammad Ahmad (the guy who killed Gen. Gordon at Khartoum) is the Mahdi?
CRUSADER says
?♀️ I dunno
But, I always figured the turbans such devotees wore had enabled them from having British bullets penetrate their skulls….
Well, there is this from Wikipedia:
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad aroused much opposition particularly from Muslim leaders owing to his messianic claims, opinion of him was not entirely negative. Many leading Muslim scholars, theologians and prominent journalists who were his contemporaries or had come into contact with him, had, despite differing with him in matters of belief, praised his personal character and acclaimed his works in the cause of Islam and the manner of his argumentation against proclaimants of other religions.
The teachings that Jesus survived crucifixion, migrating towards the east in search of the Israelite tribes that had settled there and that he died a natural death upon earth, as propounded by Ghulam Ahmad, have been a source of ongoing friction with the Christian church since they challenge the core beliefs of Christianity and would nullify the doctrines of vicarious atonement and resurrection, the two principal tenets of Christianity.
Western scholars and historians have acknowledged this fact as one of the features of Ghulam Ahmad’s legacy.
Ghulam Ahmad was the first to propose a post-crucifixion journey to India for Jesus and the first—other than the local people—to identify the Roza Bal shrine in Kashmir as the tomb of Jesus. These ideas have been further expanded upon since his death in light of subsequent findings, both by Ahmadis and individuals independent of the Ahmadiyya movement.
However, the views remain controversial having been dismissed by some, while being supported by others. Anthropological research tends to corroborate a link between the tribes of Israel and the peoples of south/central Asia, specifically the Pashtuns of Afghanistan and the people of Kashmir– as suggested by Ghulam Ahmad in his book “Jesus in India”, (and by others) – while findings from genetic evidence seem to remain equivocal.
Jesus’ survival of crucifixion and his natural death have become an important element of Ahmadi belief and Ahmadis have published extensively on this topic.
A number of modern Muslim scholars and Muslim intellectuals seem to conform to the idea of Jihad as fundamentally a peaceful religious endeavour rather than chiefly (or unconditionally) a militaristic struggle, in accordance with Ghulam Ahmad’s standpoint on the issue.
One of the main sources of dispute during his lifetime and continuing since then is Ghulam Ahmad’s use of the terms nabi (“prophet”) and rasool (messenger) when referring to himself. Most non-Ahmadi Muslims consider Muhammad to be the last of the prophets, and believe that Ghulam Ahmad’s use of these terms is a violation of the concept of the Finality of Prophethood. His followers fall into two factions in this regards. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, which comprises by far the majority of Ahmadis, believes that Ghulam Ahmad’s prophetic status does not in any way infringe the finality of Muhammad’s prophethood – to which it is wholly subservient and from which it is inseparable – and is in accordance with scriptural prophecies concerning the advent of the Messiah in Islam. This group is currently headed by Ghulam Ahmad’s fifth caliph, or successor, carrying the title of Khalifatul Masih, an institution believed to have been established soon after his death.
The Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement, which comprises a small fraction of all Ahmadis and believes in an allegorical understanding of these terms with reference to Ghulam Ahmad, formed in 1914 when a number of prominent Ahmadis seceded from the main body soon after the election of Mirza Mahmud Ahmad as the second caliph. This group is administered by a body of people called the Anjuman Ishaat-e-Islam (“movement for the propagation of Islam”), headed by an Emir.
The movement initiated by Ghulam Ahmad – which is often seen to have emerged as an Islamic religious response to the Christian and Arya Samaj missionary activity widespread in 19th century India, and is viewed by its adherents as embodying the promised latter day revival of Islam – has, since its establishment, grown in organisational strength and in its own missionary programme under the leadership of its caliphate.
Although it has expanded to over 200 countries and territories of the world, numbering an estimated 10 to 20 million, it has received a largely negative (often hostile) response from mainstream Muslims who view Ghulam Ahmad as a false messiah and his teachings as heretical, particularly the teaching that he was a prophet.
Pakistan is the only state that specifically requires every Pakistani Muslim to denigrate Ghulam Ahmad as an impostor and his followers as non-Muslims when applying for a passport or a national ID card.
CRUSADER says
The above mentioned Ahmad having responded to Arya Samaj movement…
Here is this for consideration and edification:
https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-Islam-Arya-Samaj
Islam is a religion and Arya Samaj is not.
Neither the founder of Arya Samaj nor the followers consider themselves a different religion. Infact it is considered one of the achievements of Arya Samaj that it has survived for so long without turning into just another sect of Hinduism. It never became Dayanandi Sampradaya.
Swami Dayanand in Satyarth Prakash “I do not have the slightest of intentions of creating any new sect or religion. My sole aim is to elucidate the truth.”
Whereas… the founder and follower of Islam, both, invoke in many places in Quran that Islam is the truest of all Religions and Muhammed is the final messemger of God.
This brings us to second points.
Founders:
Swami Dayanand was an educated Monk, a Sanskritist with highest authority and a Celebate Saint who had renunciated possessions of his wealthy family. Muhammed’s life seems too engaged in mundane living.
Concept of God:
Arya Samaj believes in Formless Omnipresent God, a concept unique to Vedas, while Islam believes in a God with body sitting on a throne in Heaven.
Concept of Prophets/Rishis:
Arya Samaj does not believes in Prophets or similar agents of God. Arya Samaj believes when a Yogi ascends in his Yogic abilities he interacts with God directly. Such a person is called Rishi (male) or Rishika (female). Yes, there have been many female Rishikas. There is no female Prophet in Islam.
Concept of Hell and Heaven:
There is no hell in Vedas so they do not believe in one. The ultimate purpose according to them is the same as most all — “To get rid of the cycle of Birth and Death”. In Islam the purpose is to achieve Jannah …which is full of unending Sense-gratification.
Women:
Women and Men have equal rights in Arya Samaj. Arya Samaj movement is widely known for its women empowerment reforms. Not the same in Islam.
Social Justice and Sins:
Arya Samaj does not believe in any birth-based system and considers all humans as equals. In Islam a believer is better than a non-believer in the eyes of Allah. In Islam a believer deserves Heaven and a non-believer deserves Hell. While Arya Samaj believes in the theory of Karma, as you sow so shall you reap, irrespective of your faith.
Stand on Idol-Worship:
Arya Samaj does not worship idols because it believes in the concept of formless omnipresent divinity, while Islam does not worship idols because the borrowed second commandment says so. This is where many believe Arya Samaj and Islam has the same stand — but if you know the reason, they actually stand exactly opposite.
Attitude of Followers:
Arya Samajis are too idealistic. They expect others to adopt reforms as simply as they did. And they do not shy away from arguments. But at the same time they do not push their religion down into someone else’s throat. This has been a reason of their downfall. Out of their idealist nature they expect their kids to find interest in spirituality intrinsically …whereas Islam is finding it tough to co-exist peacefully anywhere on the globe.
Angemon says
Why wouldn’t they be? They’re:
a) a minority
b) mostly non-white
c) that claims to teach “peaceful” islam [in methods, not in the final goal]
d) being oppressed for their beliefs [by other muslims]
There was actually a tactical advantage to be had by imprisoning Japanese-Americans (I’ll leave out the part where they’re called “Japanese” first and “American” second). The US Navy had cracked the Japanese codes and knew of proven collaborators/sympathisers with the Imperial Japan in US soil. Instead of arresting them and them only, thus letting the Japanese military know they could decipher their messages, arresting a bunch of people at once would make it seem the collaborators/sympathisers were simply caught in a wide net.
Stefan says
Ahmadis are truely moderate and peaceful.
In Israel, the Ahmadi sect has its own mosque on top of Mt. Carmel, in the heart of Jewish quarter of Haifa.
The relations between the minuscule Ahmadi community and the Jews in Israel have always been excellent.
Is this relevant to the Jihad that the Sunni and Shia wage for the liquidation of Israel and the extermination of Jews?
Obviously, not at all.
Ahmadis are relevant only to Ahmadis.
Moreover, in Israel lives a small community of Circasians, who are orthodox Sunnis like the Arabs. They came from Caucasus to the Middle East in the 1700’s and 1800’s, as refugees from the wars between the Ottoman and Russian Empires.
Like the Druze and unlike the other Arab citizens, all Circassian men serve as fighters in the Israeli Defense Forces, as enlisted men or officers and are very loyal to the country.
Have these exceptions any relevance to the Great Islam Jihad against the Kuffars and Israel?
The obvious conclusion is that to any rule you’ll find its exceptions. So what?
marc says
you are confusing the Ahmadi water carriers for jihad with the decent honest Bahá’í who not islamic in anyway.
And yep, I have worked with Druze, you can trust them to watch your back in any situation, they are true Israelis and highly respected. Druze while muslim, put state before scripture.
CRUSADER says
It’s been my experience that Baha’i behave in very Islamic fashion: sans alcohol, separate roles for women, glass ceiling for women, distinctly male led, and a significant use of Arabic and Persian incorporated, as well as inclusion of Islamic inspirations.
CRUSADER says
How can there be any Muslims who we can trust?
From the conclusions here at JW, it seems surprising that Druze are Muslims to trust implicitly.
Meanwhile, here is this:
———————————
Bahá’ís believe in Muhammad as a prophet of God, and in the Qur’an as the word of God. Baha’i teachings ‘affirm that Islam is a true religion revealed by Allah’; accordingly, members of the faith can give full assent to the traditional words of the Shahadah.
https://bahaiteachings.org/is-the-bahai-faith-islam-lite
“Baha’i is sort of Islam lite…”
Some still erroneously believe that the Baha’i Faith is a sect or an “offshoot” of Islam. Since 19th Century Persia (now Iran) served as the cradle of the Baha’i Faith in its earliest days, that impression continues even among a few otherwise educated people. Despite all the legitimate and accurate information about the Baha’i Faith now available online, some websites still cling to that old misinformation.
So the idea isn’t new, and persists in some quarters. We’ve had many questions on the subject of how the Baha’i Faith relates and compares to Islam from BahaiTeachings . org readers in Muslim countries. To answer those questions, I thought it might be instructive to outline the relationship of the Baha’i Faith to Islam, by offering a short history and then comparing and contrasting the laws and principles of each Faith in this series of articles.
One upfront caveat, however: I make no claim to any erudite scholarship in this area. I’ve been a Baha’i for almost fifty years, and as a Baha’i I’ve studied all of the major global Faiths including Islam—but I do not possess a great deal of scholarly expertise in Islamic theology, jurisprudence and law. Hopefully, those who do will weigh in as we publish the articles in this series, and contribute to the dialogue.
I will say, however, that I have great respect for all the Muslims I know, and as a Baha’i I believe Muhammad was a prophet of God and the Qur’an a Holy Book. I love and respect Muhammad and his teachings, as all Baha’is do.
That’s because Baha’u’llah—who came from a Muslim background, just as Christ came from a Jewish heritage—specifically honored Muhammad and his teachings. Baha’is see Islam as the parent religion of their Faith, in the same way Judaism gave birth to Christianity. Since Baha’u’llah’s teachings emerged from a Muslim culture and its mystical Sufi belief system, the Baha’i Faith and Islam have some similarities—they both believe in one God, in the validity and exalted station of the religions that came before, and in the sacred nature of the human soul.
However, the Baha’i Faith differs significantly from Islam, especially as Islam is practiced today. Let’s take a look, in a general way, at those similarities and differences.
First, the Baha’i teachings say that the “whole world” should “acknowledge the greatness of Muhammad and all the Heaven-sent Teachers:”
The people of Islam were taught to realize how Jesus came from God and was born of the Spirit, and that He must be glorified of all men. Moses was a prophet of God, and revealed in His day and for the people to whom He was sent, the Book of God.
Muhammad recognized the sublime grandeur of Christ and the greatness of Moses and the prophets. If only the whole world would acknowledge the greatness of Muhammad and all the Heaven-sent Teachers, strife and discord would soon vanish from the face of the earth, and God’s Kingdom would come among men.
The people of Islam who glorify Christ are not humiliated by so doing.
Christ was the Prophet of the Christians, Moses of the Jews — why should not the followers of each prophet recognize and honour the other prophets also? If men could only learn the lesson of mutual tolerance, understanding, and brotherly love, the unity of the world would soon be an established fact.
– Abdu’l-Baha,
Paris Talks, pp. 48-49.
Recognizing and honoring all the prophets of God not only leads to love, understanding and unity—it also leads to a greater clarity and knowledge about each religion’s unique role in history, and in the progressive revelation of God’s continuing guidance for humanity.
Islam began when Muhammad declared his mission in 610 AD. His monotheistic message ultimately united the warring tribes of the Arabian Peninsula, and contributed to enormous, civilizing advances in jurisprudence, education and spiritual development.
For several hundred years after Islam began, its influence created the first universities and led to an explosion of the world’s scientific knowledge. While Europe languished in the Dark Ages, Islam flourished.
Islam, however—like all of the previous major world religions—
then began to suffer a decline:
Behold how the sayings and doings of Shi’ih Islam have dulled the joy and fervor of its early days, and tarnished the pristine brilliancy of its light. In its primitive days, whilst they still adhered to the precepts associated with the name of their Prophet, the Lord of mankind, their career was marked by an unbroken chain of victories and triumphs. As they gradually strayed from the path of their Ideal Leader and Master, as they turned away from the light of God and corrupted the principle of His Divine unity, and as they increasingly centered their attention upon them who were only the revealers of the potency of His Word, their power was turned into weakness, their glory into shame, their courage into fear. Thou dost witness to what a pass they have come.
– Baha’u’llah, quoted by Shoghi Effendi in
The World Order of Baha’u’llah, pp. 172-173.
This decline among the followers of the radiant light of Muhammad, according to the Baha’i teachings, ultimately led to sectarianism, war and dissolution. Shi’a and Sunni Islam lost their primacy, their ecclesiastical institutions and their Sultanate and Caliphate.
When religion declines, the Baha’i teachings assert, it must be renewed.
That renewal occurred in mid-19th Century Persia, when Baha’u’llah declared his mission and founded the Baha’i Faith.
——————————————————-
So… after all that, YOU DECIDE :
Now, are Baha’i actually * not * Islamic?
Are they solely victims of Moslem persecution?
Can the Baha’i be used as a blunted tool to pry Muslims away from Islam’s grip?
Or…
Are they just useful idiots for propagating Moohamhead?
RonaldB says
Funny thing.
The excellent column is an exposition of the Ahmaddi sect of Islam, and all of a sudden, you’re trying to shift the focus to Baha’i, answering questions nobody asked.
There are a lot of parallels between the Ahmaddi and the Baha’i. Both sects descended directly from Islam, both revere Muhammad and the Koran (and Hadith), and both explain away inconvenient Muslim teachings from the Koran and Hadith as either inauthentic, or as applying only to that particular time and locale. Incidentally, both were begun by an imam who claimed to be a prophet, a huge, major no-no in Islam, which says Muhammad was the last prophet. Also, both are peaceful and civilized and have amicable relations with Israel.
By some inexplicable twist of fate, Baha’i no longer consider themselves Muslim, while the Ahmaddi do. Neither sect is particularly liked by mainstream Muslims.
The central question of the series on Ahmaddiya is, as a denatured form of Islam, does the Ahmaddiya sect immunize the non-Muslim host society, or does it weaken the host society?
Should we be asking the same questions about the Baha’is? It wasn’t my intention until you attempted to shift the focus from the Ahmaddiya to the Baha’i.
CRUSADER says
There are parallels.
And, having been to a few of the Baha’i temples and to Haifa, myself, and having witnessed how Baha’i rationalize matters according to their reverence toward Islam and Impresario Moohamhead, as per previous post, it seemed relevant.
Both of these false directions of faith deflect from Islam’s threatening and menacing reality. Both have helped to make Islam be perceived as relatively benign since they both stem from and utilize much from Islam.
RonaldB says
For Crusader:
This quote was in one of your postings:
It turns out the block of text was from your reference, although that was not immediately clear. So, your personal position on questions becomes murky.
I would suggest encasing all your cutting and pasting in a blockquote format so it becomes immediately obvious what is yours and what is from the reference.
text you wish to set off
Notice I substituted “bl**kqu*te” for “blockquote” in my illustration. This is necessary to fool the browser.
RonaldB says
“” text “”
RonaldB says
https://www.w3schools.com/tags/tag_blockquote.asp
CRUSADER says
Baha’i…..?
I think they are open to a 10th revelation of divine education for the world in about 300 to 700 years, or so….
Till then, aren’t Baha’i the finally word and revelation?
They got it all…. like an all-inclusive divine resort.
gravenimage says
The Baha’i truly are peaceful. But they also regularly spout apologia for Islam–there was a Baha’i here for many years who did just that.
CRUSADER says
The Bahá’í Faith teaches that Muhammad was a man of peace.
On the occasions when he did fight, he only did so in order to defend himself and his followers from the hostile pagan Arab tribes who inhabited the Arabian Peninsula in his time. `Abdu’l-Bahá claimed that ‘Muhammad never fought against the Christians’, though this ignores the Battle of Tabouk – a military expedition which, according to Muslim biographies, was launched by Muhammad against the Romans in 630 CE.
Hadith —-
`Abdu’l-Bahá taught that some stories about the teachings, deeds and sayings of Muhammad as described in certain hadith which he perceived to be negative, were fabricated due to ‘fanaticism’, ‘ignorance’ or ‘enmity’. He told that most of those who narrated such stories were either members of the ‘clergy’, ‘antagonistic’ or ‘ignorant Muslims who repeated unfounded traditions about Muhammad which they ignorantly believed to be to His praise.’ Thus, he says, ‘some benighted Muslims made His polygamy the pivot of their praises’.
While disregarding some hadith about Muhammad as fabrications and exaggerations with no foundation, `Abdu’l-Bahá accepted the authenticity of others. For example, traditions about Muhammad’s friendly treatment of the Christians of Najran of whom Muhammad is said to have proclaimed: ‘If any one infringes their rights, I myself will be his enemy, and in the presence of God I will bring a charge against him.’ According to Bahá’í belief, in this time Muslims and Christians lived in harmony with each other, however, ‘after a certain time’, due to ‘the transgression of both Muhammadans and the Christians, hatred and enmity arose between them.’
————
Uh-huh!!
gravenimage says
Yep–just this sort of Taqiyya. This poor fellow regularly twisted himself into knots trying to justify the savagery of Muhammed, and explain how all of this barbarism was somehow supposed to be non-violent.
Kepha says
The elites’ fascination with and love of the Ahmadis seems to have started with Arnold Toynbee.
gravenimage says
The Ahmadis: The Establishment’s Favorite Muslims
……………..
The Ahmadis may be able to convince many of the hopeful Infidels that they represent “True Islam”. but no orthodox Muslim accepts this. As many have noted, the Ahmadiyya Muslims are persecuted and murdered in Dar-al-Islam.
CRUSADER says
“True Islam” ☪️
IS/ISIS/ISIL/Daesh
versus
Ahmadism
????
UNCLE VLADDI says
The Ahmadiyya, falsely portrayed as ‘moderates’ due to corny slogans like “hatred for none, love for all”, are a fiercely proselytising sect often prosecuted in Islamic countries for heresy. In the West, they are falsely perceived to be non-violent, although their head honcho personally threatened Geert Wilders and all those who oppose Islam with ‘destruction’.